摘要:目的: 比較咪達普利與培哚普利對原發(fā)性高血壓患者的的降壓效果和不良反應(yīng)。 方法 :將入選的60例1～2級高血壓病患者,隨機分為2組,咪達普利組,每日晨起口服咪達普利(5～10 mg,1次/d),培哚普利組,每日晨起口服培哚普利(4～8 mg,1次/d)。治療4周,觀察2組治療前、后的血壓,記錄不良反應(yīng)。 結(jié)果 :經(jīng)治療后咪達普利與培哚普利組血壓均明顯下降(Plt;0.05),組間差異無統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義(P＞0.05);總不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生率咪達普利組16.8%,培哚普利組20%,而咪達普利組的咳嗽發(fā)生率為6.8%,培哚普利組為16.8%。 結(jié)論 :咪達普利和培哚普利均能有效降壓,二者降壓效果相似,但咪達普利的咳嗽發(fā)生率較低。Abstract: Objective: To compare the antihypertensive efficacy and safety of imidapril versus peridopril in patients with essential hypertension. Methods : Selected 60 patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension, in which divided two groups by random.They were administered imidapril 5～10 mg once daily or and peridopril 4～8 mg once daily for 4 weeks. During the curative period of 4 weeks, the antihypertensive efficacy and adverse reaction were observed. Results :The blood pressure drecreased prominently in both groups after four weeks treament(Plt;0.05), but there was no significant difference in antihypertensive efficacy between the two groups(P＞0.05). The occurrence of the total adverse reaction in imidapril and peridopril groups was 16.8% and 20%, respectively, while the occurrence of the cough in two groups was 6.8% and 16.8%, respectively. Conclusion :Both imidapril and peridopril exert favourable and similar hepotensive effect, however the cough occurrence of imidapril is lower than that of peridopril.